On April 15, 1999, I issued an Arbitration Award resolving a grievance between the
above-captioned parties. I denied the grievance in part and granted it in part. The grievance
was denied to
the extent that Ponath and Beversdorf were not entitled to pay increases after 8, 16 or 32
weeks of
employment, but the grievance was granted to the extent that Perry was entitled to advance
to the
16 and 32 week steps of the salary schedule. I ordered a make whole remedy for Perry.

On October 18, 1999, the parties' representatives initiated a conference call to the
undersigned concerning my April 15, 1999 Award. In that conference call, they mutually
requested
clarification of a part of the Award. The part in question was in the
FACTS section of the Award
and will be identified below. Pursuant to the parties' mutual request, the undersigned issues
the
following Supplemental Arbitration Award.

5961

Page 2

A-5734

DISCUSSION

In my April 15, 1999 Award, I made the following statements on pages 3 and 4 of
the
FACTS section:

When the parties negotiated their 1995-1998 collective
bargaining agreement, they agreed that
effective November 1, 1995, new employes would be paid a starting wage of $9.20/hour.
They
further agreed that these new hires would receive the following wage adjustments at the
following
intervals:

Start $9.20

After 8 weeks: $9.40

After 16 weeks: $9.70

After 32 weeks: $10.00

After 52 weeks: The regular hourly
rate then in effect.

In the summer of 1998, the full scale pay
rate referenced above (i.e. the rate after 52 weeks of
employment) was $11.60/hour.

When the parties negotiated their current
collective bargaining agreement in 1998, they did
not change any of the new hire wage rates listed above. Thus, they left the start rate at
$9.20/hour.
Similarly, all the other wage rates listed above for new hires were unchanged. Under this
contract,
the full scale pay rate (i.e. the rate after 52 weeks of employment) is $11.95/hour. When
the parties
negotiated their current collective bargaining agreement, they did not address the matter of
what
would happen if the Company hired a new employe at a pay rate higher than the start rate
listed above
(i.e. $9.20/hour).

While the new hire start rate listed in the
contract is $9.20/hour, the record indicates that the
Company has had to pay more than that to attract new workers. The Company's current
new hire
start rate is $10.20/hour. This figure of $10.20/hour as the new hire start rate is not
referenced in the
contract; instead, as previously noted, the new hire start rate referenced in the contract is
$9.20/hour.
The record indicates that the Company has hired an unspecified number of new employes at
$10.20/hour. When it has done so, it has given them wage increases after 8, 16, 32, and 52
weeks
of employment. Specifically, the Company has been paying new hires according to the
following
schedule:

Page 3

A-5734

Start $10.20

After 8 weeks: $10.40

After 16 weeks: $10.70

After 32 weeks: $11.00

After 52 weeks: The regular hourly
rate then in effect.

In essence, the Company has been paying
$1.00 an hour more than what the contract specifies
at the start rate, and after 8, 16, and 32 weeks of employment. The record indicates that the
Union
was aware of, and consented to, these higher pay rates.

. . .

The requested clarification involves the last full paragraph quoted above.

The Company requested a clarification of this paragraph for the following reason.
Company
President Garni indicated that while the Company pays some new hires $10.20/hour to start,
it does
not always do so; some new hires are being paid $9.20/hour to start. The Union does not
dispute this
factual assertion.

When I wrote the last paragraph quoted above, and specifically made the statement,
"The
Company's current new hire start rate is $10.20/hour", it was my understanding that all new
hires
were being paid $10.20/hour to start. I learned in the conference call that I was mistaken in
that
regard. While some new hires are being paid $10.20/hour to start, not all new hires are
being paid
that amount; some are being paid $9.20/hour to start. $9.20, of course, is the start rate
listed in the
collective bargaining agreement.

As I noted in the DISCUSSION section of my
Award, the Union does not object to the
Company paying new hires more than the start rate listed in the collective bargaining
agreement.
Since there is no objection by the Union, the Company can pay new hires more than
$9.20/hour if it
wants to do so.

As just noted, the Company is paying some new hires $10.20/hour. However, just
because
the Company is paying some new hires $10.20/hour does not mean that all new
hires must be paid
at that rate. The only way that all new hires would be entitled to a rate above
$9.20/hour is if the
parties had a side agreement that modified or changed the collective bargaining agreement
and raised
the start rate. Notwithstanding what I wrote in the
FACTS section, the parties herein do not have
a side agreement that all new hires will be paid $10.20/hour. In the absence of
a side agreement
modifying the collective bargaining

Page 4

A-5734

agreement, the agreement's written terms are controlling. The agreement specifies in
plain terms that
the start rate for new hires is $9.20/hour. While the Company can pay new hires more than
that if
it wants, it is not required to do so. Thus, the Company does not have to pay
all new hires
$10.20/hour.